The Goat Model
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5
×
 

The Goat Model

on

  • 6,233 views

Part of FARM-Africa's working paper series, the goat model demonstrates poverty reduction achievable through the development of profitable goat enterprises in Africa.

Part of FARM-Africa's working paper series, the goat model demonstrates poverty reduction achievable through the development of profitable goat enterprises in Africa.

Statistics

Views

Total Views
6,233
Views on SlideShare
6,233
Embed Views
0

Actions

Likes
2
Downloads
171
Comments
0

0 Embeds 0

No embeds

Accessibility

Categories

Upload Details

Uploaded via as Adobe PDF

Usage Rights

© All Rights Reserved

Report content

Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
  • Full Name Full Name Comment goes here.
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
    Processing…
Post Comment
Edit your comment

The Goat Model The Goat Model Document Transcript

  • Working PapersFARM-Africa’s Working Papers provide a forum for FARM-Africa staffto share key aspects and experiences drawn from their work with a wideraudience in an effective and timely manner. The series, available in print anddigital formats, comprises short outputs from FARM-Africa’s programmesin East and Southern Africa and will be of interest to NGO andintergovernmental staff, government personnel, researchers and academicsworking in the fields of African and agricultural development. 9. The Goat ModelInformation published in the series may reflect work, thinking anddevelopment in progress and, as such, should be treated, and referred to,as draft information only. It should not be considered as FARM-Africa’s final A proven approach to reducing povertyposition on any issue and should be welcomed as a contribution to sharinginformation and expertise openly within the international community. among smallholder farmers in Africa by developing profitable goat enterprisesFor further information on FARM-Africa’s Working Papers, and sustainable support servicesplease contact:Communications DepartmentFARM-AfricaCliffords InnFetter LaneLondon EC4A 1BZ Working Version 1 forUK comment: June 2007T +44 (0) 20 7430 0440 F +44 (0) 20 7430 0460E info@farmafrica.org.uk W www.farmafrica.org.uk© FARM-Africa 2007
  • FARM-AFRICA WORKING PAPERS No. 9 The Goat Model A proven approach to reducing poverty among smallholder farmers in Africa by developing profitable goat enterprises and sustainable support servicesWorking Version 1 for commentJune 2007
  • FARM-Africa Working PapersFARM-Africa’s new strategy (2006) aims to scale-up the impact of our work in Eastern andSouth Africa; enabling many more rural Africans to benefit from our solutions to povertyreduction.FARM-Africa’s Working Papers capture work, thinking and development in progress toinform practitioners and policy makers about our work at the grassroots. The seriesspecifically includes: descriptions of models of rural development; project reports andevaluations; outcomes of on-going research/projects; innovative aspects of projects; practicalexamples from our work; synthesised workshop proceedings; case studies illustrating aparticular FARM-Africa technology/intervention; application of particular tools; narratives ofmicro-level projects; and, conference papers. The series should be treated, and referred to,as draft information only. The Working Papers do not constitute FARM-Africas finalposition on any issue and should be welcomed as a contribution to sharing informationand expertise openly within the international community.FARM-Africa’s Working Papers can be downloaded from FARM-Africa’s website onhttp://www.farmafrica.org.uk/view_publications.cfm?DocTypeID=11 or contact theCommunications Department to request a hard copy.Communications Department, FARM-Africa, Ground Floor, Clifford’s Inn, Fetter Lane,London, EC4A 1BZ, UKT +44 (0) 20 7430 0440 F +44 (0) 20 7430 0460E info@farmafrica.org.uk W www.farmafrica.org.ukRegistered Charity No. 326901Registered Company No. 01926828 © FARM-Africa, 2007 FEEDBACK We would like to know what you think about this Working Paper. Please complete the feedback sheet on page 53 of this publication and send it to us by post to the above address or email to info@farmafrica.org.uk.
  • AcknowledgementsChristie Peacock wrote this publication and has overseen the development of the goatmodel since 1988.The Goat Model has been developed through the hard work and commitment ofcountless FARM-Africa staff, collaborators and farmers, of whom we would particularlylike to acknowledge the following.FARM-Africa Staff: Patrick Mutia, Camillus Ahuya, Boniface Kaberia, Jacob Mutemi,Anthony Murithi, James Kithuka, Zahra Ali, Christine Alokit-Olaunah, ShamilahNamusisi, Allan Bisagaya, Margaret Namugwanya, Lukumay, Kettema Yilma, ZewduAyele, Kassaye Hadgu Laurence Thiauru, George Kiriinya, Irene Kamau. Sultan andDickson Murithi. Government staff: Charles Ikunyua, James Mathenge, HenryKirimi, Frederick Njeru, Alphonse Njeru,, Laban Rintuara, Martina Marangu, JacobMuuna and Silas Kamundi. Veterinary professionals: Alice Wambui, JustusMuguongo and Maurice Kiome. Farmers: Gete, Kawate, Maimouna, Fabian Bicia,Paskasio Gitonga, Japhet Munyua, Cyprian Irambu, Victoria Gathone, Joseph Kaungo,John Muthengi, Chief Samson KimathiThe British Government’s Department for International Development (DFID) —formerly the Overseas Development Administration — and the European Union (EU)have been the major donors supporting the development of the Goat Model inEthiopia and Kenya over the last 19 years.German Agro-action supported the goat programme in Tanzania and the McKnightFoundation supported it in Uganda. Other donors include Cordaid, Band Aid, ICAP,David Whitbread Estate, Safaricom, Daily Telegraph readers, Guernsey Overseas Fund,Accenture employee charity fund, FARM-Africa’s individual supporters, Sulney Fieldsand Vinson Charitable Trust.However the contents of this publication are the responsibility of FARM-Africa alone.© FARM-Africa 2007 i
  • ii
  • Contents1. Introduction....................................................................................................................................................12. The Goat Model in a nutshell..............................................................................................................13. The major problems confronting smallholder farmers — how the Goat Model canhelp ..........................................................................................................................................................................24. Situations suitable to apply the Goat Model..............................................................................45. Situations not suitable to apply the Goat Model.....................................................................56. Key elements ensuring success — learning from the past.................................................67. Where and when has the Goat Model been tested and lessons learned ...............9 Ethiopia 1988-2000 Tanzania, Babati District 1991-2004 Kenya, Meru and Tharaka-Nithi Districts 1996-2004 Uganda, Mbale District 2003-ongoing Kenya, Mwingi and Kitui Districts (in drier area) 2004-ongoing8. The Goat Model – implementation procedure.....................................................................279. Adopting the Goat Model..................................................................................................................4210. FARM-Africa support to adopters..............................................................................................50 iii
  • AcronymsAIDS Acquired Immune Deficiency SyndromeAHA Animal Health AssistantsASAL Arid and Semi-Arid LandsCAHW Community Animal Health WorkerDFID Department for International DevelopmentEAGODEN East African Goat Development NetworkGOE Government of EthiopiaGOK Government of KenyaHIV Human Immunodeficiency VirusILCA International Livestock Centre for AfricaILRI International Livestock Research Institute (formerly ILCA)IPAL Integrated Project on Arid LandsMAHWG Meru Animal Health Workers’ GroupMGBA Meru Goat Breeders’ AssociationODA Overseas Development AdministrationSR-CRSP Small Ruminant Collaborative Research Support ProgramTAU Training and Advisory UnitWAC World Agroforestry Centre iv
  • 1. IntroductionFARM-Africa’s strategy is to develop models of good practice in agriculturaldevelopment that other organisations can adopt and apply in their own situations. Inthis way FARM-Africa seeks to have greater impact on rural poverty in Africa than itcould do by working alone (FARM-Africa, 2007). FARM-Africa has been implementinggoat projects in East and South Africa since 1988. Over that time FARM-Africa haslearned a great deal about how to design effective goat improvement programmes thatreally work and have a significant and lasting impact on the lives of smallholder farmersand their families. This experience, together with the experience of others, has beendistilled into what FARM-Africa terms The Goat Model — described in this publication.FARM-Africa has tested the model in four countries and five different situations andhas refined the approach to what is presented below.The purpose of this document is to give readers enough information to lead them toconsider adopting the Goat Model themselves, or for the readers to persuade othersto consider adopting the model in their own programmes.2. The goat model in a nutshellAt the heart of the model is an approach to improving the productivity and economicreturns of goats kept by families on small farms. This is achieved by enhancing themanagement, health and breeding of goats. Critical to the sustainability of theimproved performance is basing all the necessary support services and inputs –veterinary care, breed improvement and training – in the hands of farmer groups, orprivate service providers trained from the community. Farmer-managed organisationsare established to co-ordinate and extend services before and after the interventionperiod. The approach has been tested in four countries in East Africa since 1988 andhas been found to generate significant and sustained economic, social andenvironmental benefits to both households and communities. The model may betargeted at vulnerable households such as those affected by HIV/AIDS or householdsheaded by women. The model has generated sufficient economic benefits to enablefamilies to invest in new on- and off-farm enterprises. However, the model is not a 1
  • quick-fix solution, but takes two-five years to yield the full range of substantialbenefits.3. The major problems confronting smallholder farmers – howthe Goat Model can helpThe problems facing farmers farming small plots in Africa are manifold. Most farmerscontinue to rely on growing staple crops for survival mixed with a few crops for sale.The decline in the real prices of many traditional cash crops, e.g. coffee, tea andtobacco, combined with uncertain markets, all contribute to the growing anddeepening poverty seen in rural Africa today. Child malnutrition rates continue to risein many parts of Africa despite increased investment in health services and, in manycountries, despite the benefits of wider economic growth 1 . HIV/AIDS is taking its toll,leaving behind dislocated and impoverished families, many of which are nursing sickfamily members. The stark reality is that smallholder farmers have few options toimprove their lives and the lives of their children. Many demands are placed on familyincomes for food, clothing, school fees and healthcare. If the cash is not there peoplesuffer and do not reach their human potential.A decline in farm size with each generation inheriting land further decreases availablehousehold options. Intensification of crop production may be an option for somefarmers but many farm plots used for generations are experiencing declining yieldsfrom over use, and if not protected, loss of soil through soil erosion. Farmers areincreasingly being pushed to farm land unsuitable for cultivation - at lower altitudesunder lower and less reliable rainfall or on steeper slopes unsuitable for cultivation.This cultivation on the margins leaves more and more families increasingly vulnerableto the vagaries of the weather. The impact of climate change is only likely to make adifficult situation worse.Livestock play a critical role in supporting families in most parts of rural Africa. Inpastoral societies they are fundamental to the livelihoods of people. In mixed farmingareas livestock support families in many different and often unrecognised ways.Livestock are often the only asset of the family sold in times of trouble or for cash to1 Reference not available at time of production 2
  • pay school fees or medical bills (Heffernan, 2006). Furthermore improving theproduction and marketing of livestock and their products offers rural producers andopportunity market high-value products to urban consumers (Delgado, Rosegrant,Steinfeld, Ehui and Courbois, 1999).There is much misunderstanding about the environmental impact of goats. Goats arefrequently and conveniently blamed for the environmental damage caused by pastovergrazing by other ruminants, particularly cattle and overuse by man. The goat isoften found in degraded environments, because it is the only species able to survive onthe few bushes and shrubs that remain after the grass has been grazed out by cattleand sheep or ploughed out by man, or where the trees have been cut down by man(Field, 1978). Found ‘at the scene of the crime’ goats are often erroneously blamed forit. This simplistic thinking does nothing to solve the underlying problems ofenvironmental mismanagement. The FARM-Africa Goat Model offers significantenvironmental benefits and is an example of how well managed livestock can have abeneficial effect on the environment.Farmers in most parts of Africa also receive little support in the form of advice,training and inputs from their government. The decline in agricultural support servicesin recent years has left a vacuum in most rural areas, only filled by the private sector inhigh potential areas, which offer larger and more reliable markets. NGOs are not theanswer, and are only able to offer very variable support and a patchy coverage.Major problems addressed by the Goat ModelIn the above environment the Goat Model specifically addresses;• Low farm incomes• Child malnutrition• Vulnerability of households due to owning few assets• Poor soil fertility• Environmental degradation• Low self esteem, management skill and group cohesion of smallholder farmers 3
  • 4. Situations suitable to apply the modelThe goat model is most suitable in densely populated areas where families areintensively farming small plots of land. Typically farmers may have small farms of 0.25-2ha and grow a variety of crops, including a few cash crops. Rainfall is likely to beabove 500mm p.a. A small number of livestock — cattle, goats, sheep, pigs or chickens— may also be kept. The lack of communal grazing areas and intensive cropping meansthat livestock are often confined in some way by tethering or stall-feeding, for all orpart of the year. Crop residues, e.g. sweet potato tops, maize stalks, will often makeup the bulk of the diet of ruminant livestock. This situation is the ideal starting pointto develop the intensive, housed, goat enterprise, which is the basis of the goat model.Most people in Africa drink goat’s milk, when it is available. However most local goatbreeds only produce 200-300ml/day for a very short period 90-120 days (Peacock,1996). As a result many Africans have not had the chance to consume goat’s milkextensively but would do so if given the opportunity. There are a very small number ofethnic groups that have a cultural taboo against drinking goat’s milk and the GoatModel should not be used in those places.Mahatma Ghandi described the goat as `the poor man’s cow’ and there is no doubtthat the goat has supported poor families in Africa for thousands of years. The goatrepresents an asset — sometimes the only asset — of the family and may be the onlymeans of survival during drought and famine. In Ethiopia the sale of one goat can feed afamily of five for two months (Zewdu Ayele, 1999). Many families in desperate povertyaspire to own livestock and the goat is often the first animal they are able to buy.Enabling families to own goats through a credit programme, an optional component ofthe model, will help to lift families out of poverty and place them on the first step outof poverty. However, goats should never be given to poor families without training inimproved management and health care. In situations where management, particularlyfeeding and health care, can be improved, families that receive goats can thencrossbreed their goats through the breed improvement component of the model, andgo on to develop an intensive profitable goat enterprise.Farmers in densely populated highland areas are finding that cattle are becoming moredifficult and risky to keep because of scarcity of feed as well as the lack of veterinaryand Artificial Insemination (AI) services. In some situations, e.g. the Central Highlands 4
  • of Kenya and western Uganda where cattle were used for ploughing, plots are often sosmall that cattle are no longer needed as cultivation can be done by hand. As a resultthere is a growing interest to keep dairy goats even among cattle keepers, many ofwhom are switching from cattle to goats. A larger number of goats offers less risk thana small number of cattle.For the model to succeed it is essential that there is the potential to feed goats well,either through the collection and conservation of locally-available feeds including cropby-products, and/or through the growing of forage crops. Waste ground (around theedges of fields for example) can often be used for forage production. Keeping dairygoats also requires sufficient labour to look after them, particularly to cut and carryfeed to them.Situations suitable to apply the model• Densely populated areas with small farm sizes• Places where goat’s milk is culturally acceptable• Rainfall above 500 mm p.a.• Sufficient labour for feed collection• Supply of feed for goats• Small sites possible for forage development5. Situations not suitable to apply the modelThe Goat Model is not suitable for dry areas where goats are out grazing. In thissituation of low rainfall (<500mm p.a.), high temperatures and disease challenge, itwould not be possible, or appropriate, to develop a sedentary intensive goat systemusing exotic dairy breeds.The Goat Model should not be used in places where there is a taboo against goat’smilk. However it is worth exploring the depth of the taboo as the consumption ofgoat’s milk is often considered a sign of poverty and may not be admitted to in public,particularly by men. 5
  • The Goat Model should not be used in situations where there is very limited or weaklabour as it will only place a burden on the family members. Some HIV/AIDS affectedhousehold may fall into this category.Situations not suitable to use the model• Areas of low rainfall below 500mm p.a.• Areas of poor feed quality or high disease challenge• Places where there is a taboo against drinking goat’s milk• In households with limited or weak labour6. Key elements ensuring success – learning from the pastFARM-Africa has learned a great deal from the successes and failures of its owngrassroots projects during the last 20 years. It has also learned from the experience ofother goat development programmes through visits, workshops and the literature.FARM-Africa is an active member of the International Goat Association and foundedthe East Africa Goat Development Network (EAGODEN) to promote learning andgood practice across the region. FARM-Africa builds its learning into the design of eachsuccessive goat project developing a solid core of knowledge about what works andwhat doesn’t.Past goat development and research programmes have focused, almost exclusively, onimproving local breeds of goats. There have been very few successful livestockimprovement programmes that only focus on improving management. Mostinterventions fall into two broad categories:a) improvement programmes promoted by government institutions, such as Ministriesof Livestock or Agriculture or National Agricultural Research organisations; and,b) those promoted by non-government and church-based organisations.Examples of government programmesIn Kenya the USAID- supported Small Ruminant Collaborative Research SupportProgram (SR-CRSP) (1980-1992), implemented by the Government of Kenya, tried todevelop a new breed called the ‘Kenya Dual-Purpose Goat’ (KDPG) designed to be 6
  • suitable for smallholder systems in East Africa. To develop this new ’synthetic’ breed, acomplicated breeding plan was followed using a four-way cross between two localbreeds (Small East African and Galla) and two European breeds (Toggenburg andAnglo-Nubian) on a government breeding station in Naivasha (Fitzhugh, 1982). A smallnumber of the new breed was developed and tested on farms in western Kenya. Itsperformance was generally disappointing (Okeyo, personal communication). It wasplanned to contract commercial farmers to multiply the breed for sale and some weresent to a farm in Kilifi. The ending of donor support, amounting to several million USdollars, effectively terminated the programme and few, if any, KDPGs can be seentoday.The Ministry of Livestock Development, supported by the British Government’sOverseas Development Administration (ODA) looked at developing a different type ofdual-purpose goat more suitable for arid and semi-arid lands (ASAL). The approachtaken at the Marimanti Breeding Station in Tharaka-Nithi District (1983-1989) was toacquire several hundred Galla goats from northern Kenya and select for growth andmothering ability (Skea, 1989). The station was well-funded and as soon as this endedthe manager left and the farm quickly fell into disrepair. The goats unfortunatelydeveloped beznoites, a disease which is hard to control, forcing many goats to beculled. Eventually all the goats were sold or stolen and the buildings are now used as adistrict headquarters.Goat research in East Africa flourished in the late 1970s and 1980s and much valuableinformation about the characteristics of goat production systems was generated at thattime through the UNESCO-Integrated Project on Arid Lands (IPAL) in northern Kenya(Field, 1981) and the International Livestock Centre’s (ILCA) system study of theMaasai production system (Bekure, de Leeuw, Grandin and Neate, 1991). The SR-CRSPwork at Maseno was particularly useful in generating knowledge in feeding, forage andhealth.The German Government made significant investments in goat development in Burundiand Kenya in the 1980s and 1990s. The Burundi project at Ngozi pioneered the use ofthe buck station as a cost-effective means of crossbreeding in smallholder systems (Reyand Jacob, 1991). However the source of the breeding bucks was a breeding stationmanaged by the project. The project imported German Alpine goats and unfortunatelyintroduced the disease, Caprine Arthritis Encephalitis (CAE) into Burundi. This 7
  • complicated the management of the breeding unit and reduced its output. Whilesignificant numbers of crossbred goats were produced, once the project ended farmerswere not able to replace their bucks, inevitably leading to the gradual dilution ofAlpine blood levels and reduced performance (Rey, 1992). The Ministry of LivestockDevelopment in Kenya was supported by GTZ to establish a dairy goat project inNyeri, Kenya. However, only German Alpine bucks were imported into Kenya for usein buck stations without any females, until the very end of the project when 10 femaleswere imported. Many thousand local or ‘grade’ goats have been ‘upgraded’ and farmershave enjoyed many benefits, but the sustainability of the improvements must be indoubt without a secure supply of locally-bred replacement bucks.Community level goat developmentMany NGOs, such as Heifer Project, Send a Cow and church groups have introducedEuropean dairy breeds into villages across East Africa over many years. Theserelatively small-scale breeding programmes will have had some beneficial impactwherever the introduction of the breed is accompanied by improvements to feedingand health care. However often this training is not given, in which case the breeds areunlikely to perform anywhere near their potential, making the intervention wastefuland frequently disappointing to farmers. All these interventions suffer from the majorweakness of not being able to ensure a secure supply of the improver breed. Countlessintroductions of European breeds have disappeared without trace once the initialbreeding stock get too old to breed or simply die.Many NGOs have distributed local goats as part of their rehabilitation or developmentprogrammes in East Africa. This is often part of a support programme to familiesfollowing drought or displacement due to war or other disaster. Many of theseschemes have benefits providing vulnerable families with assets but are seldomaccompanied with much training on how to improve performance of the goatsdistributed.Key lessonsIt is clear that the major weakness of most past goat efforts, which has led most ofthem to diminish after a few years, has been the failure to develop a sustainable supplyof breeding stock. In addition few projects have genuinely lifted the skills of farmers toreally get the best out of the new breeds, or developed reliable health care systems 8
  • outside the under-funded patchy delivery of government veterinary systems. It is thesechallenges that FARM-Africa has been working on over the last 19 years and believescan be solved through the application of its Goat Model.Where and when the Goat Model has been tested and thelessons learnedFARM-Africa has been implementing goat projects for nearly 20 years. During thattime it has learned a great deal from its own projects as well as from the experiencesof others. The goat projects described below have all contributed to what FARM-Africa now terms its ‘Goat Model’ which has been developed from practical experienceof what is possible in rural Africa.Ethiopia 1988-2000The designFARM-Africa’s first goat project was in Ethiopia implemented in partnership with theGovernment of Ethiopia’s Ministry of Agriculture and two academic institutions,Alemaya University of Agriculture and Awassa College of Agriculture (now part ofDebub University) and several NGOs. It specifically targeted women-headedhouseholds in the relatively dry, drought-prone, highlands of east and southernEthiopia over 1200km apart. It focused on the poorest households, organised intogroups of 25-30, and gave each woman two local goats on credit. The women had torepay the credit received in-kind by returning a weaned kid to the group for lending toanother poor woman. A training package was developed and women were trained inimproved goat management and fodder growing. After a long period of negotiationwith the Director of Veterinary Services, women were allowed to be trained asCAHWs and earn money treating the sick goats of group and non-group members.This was the first time women were trained in this way in Ethiopia. A small number ofdrug shops were set up under the project but the government veterinary servicecontinued to offer a subsidised service undermining the private drug shops and forcingtheir closure. Cross-breeding was planned to take place at two breeding stations atAlemaya and Awassa College using the Anglo-Nubian breed. 9
  • The benefitsThe project generated many benefits to over 5,000 households. It genuinely helped thepoorest of the poor to gain self respect and some level of household food security.Women were able to sell goats during periods of drought and avoid receiving food aid(Zewdu, 1999). Many households benefited from the increased milk supply andchildren flourished. Cross-bred male goats were in great demand and commandedhigh prices, particularly during Moslem holidays. The women Community AnimalHealth Workers earned income and their status grew in their communities as theytreated sick animals belonging to men. The fodder component was particularlysuccessful in Hararghe where forage strips helped prevent soil erosion and the manurefrom goats supported vegetable production. Each of the 120 women’s groups set uptheir own savings and credit association or ekub, which they used to invest in smallbusinesses and petty trading activities. The mutual support women derived from groupmembership empowered women to develop skills and confidence they wouldotherwise not have acquired. Lessons learned from this project formed the basis ofFARM-Africa’s Women’s Enterprise Development ProjectThe project also carried out a great deal of research on goats in Ethiopia, producingthree PhDs, 11 MScs and many publications. It carried out the first survey to identifythe indigenous goat breeds of Ethiopia (FARM-Africa, 1996) and worked with theICRW on a research project looking at the potential for goats to reduce Vitamin Adeficiency (Ayalew, Wolde Gebriel and Kassa, 1999). It helped to establish goatresearch and development as a credible subject in the country.Lessons learnedThe project was severely constrained in the breed improvement component by basingit on cross-breeding in breeding stations at two academic institutions with littleinterest in community development. This conflict of interest and bureaucracy meantthat managing the breeding units was extremely difficult and production of cross-bredsfor distribution to farmers was very slow and inefficient. However women showedthemselves to be extremely capable of managing the cross-breds that were distributedand milk yields rocketed from 200ml/day to over 2 litres/day. Lactation lengthextended from two-three months to over 12 months in some cases. After visiting theGTZ project in Burundi and being impressed at the performance of the buck stations, 10
  • it was eventually agreed to introduce the approach into the project and buck stationswere established in some parts of the project area. Most buck stations performed toan acceptable standard and some were outstanding, producing over 200 kids perannum. FARM-Africa realised that the only way of ensuring a sustainable supply ofbreeding bucks in the long term was to place breeding stock in the hands of privatefarmers or community groups. Ethiopia does not have a strong commercial farmingsector and there are few Ethiopians with experience of managing commercial farms toa high standard. Pure breeding units (three females and one male) were placed withone outstanding commercial farmer in Dire Dawa and one just outside Addis Ababa.The Dire Dawa farmer is still producing cross-bred stock, whereas all the goats on theother farm died, as did the pure stock supplied to farmer groups. The problem ofensuring a continuous supply of breeding stock remains to this day.Tanzania, Babati District, 1991-2006The designFARM-Africa had a small goat component as part of its broad-based agriculturalprogramme, the Babati Rural Development Project. The goat programme targetedwomen in the poorest households and provided pure Toggenburg goats on credit togroups of four women who took it in turns to look after the female and keep a femalekid. Farmers were given a lot of training and the developed good forage plots.The benefitsThe Toggenburg Breeders’ Association (TOBRA) was set up in 1999 to manage thebreeding stock and organise the very popular goat shows, which continue to this day.From a very small start, TOBRA, remarkably, continues to be the main supplier ofpure Toggenburg goats in Tanzania. FARM-Africa also initiated the Tanzanian GoatNetwork (TAGONET), which continues to link goat practitioners together. FARM-Africa has been particularly successful, with others, at influencing the change inlegislation in Tanzania approving the training of CAHWs.Lessons learnedThis system of credit was very slow and did not make the best use of the valuableToggenburg goats. 11
  • Table 1. Case study of John — a goat keeper of many years in Babati District, TanzaniaIn addition to crop farming, I also practice goat and cattle farming. I was trained byFARM-Africa on dairy goat management and breeding of my local goats for milk. I amthe buck keeper of the Upendo Dairy Goat Group. The buck has in many ways changedmy life for the better.I have been crossing my local goats with the Toggenburg buck, and every year I get anaverage of 16 kids. I sell some every year, and have used the money to buy an ox cartand two bulls for tilling my land, iron sheet and bricks to rehabilitate my house, improvedbanana seedlings and equipment for spraying my animals against ticks. I also produceabout eight litres of milk a day. I use the milk for making tea, ghee and butter for myfamily, and sell the surplus to my neighbours. The bulls have reduced the time for tillingmy one-acre farm from three days to literally two hours. I use the manure from the bullsand the goats on the farm, which has improved my crops. Benefits from goat sales andimproved field crops have helped me to build a modern house and good sheds for mygoats, rabbits and poultry, and construct beehives.I regularly slaughter a goat, chicken or rabbit for meat for my family, which I could notafford to do before.My neighbours are mostly Maasai people who have shown a lot of interest in what I amdoing. Some have started zero grazing and bringing their goats here to be served. Oneamong them is Olemito who has now joined Upendo group. Two new groups haveformed in the village and they have visited me to see what I am doing. My two marriedsons have started dairy goat faming at their households.I get support from TOBRA, an association that brings together Toggenburg breeders, ofwhich the Upendo Group is a member.My future plans are to expand dairy goat farming and my crop fields by using moremanure. I beg my fellow farmers to form more dairy goat groups and to use goat milk,meat and manure to improve their household’s nutrition and income. 12
  • Kenya, Meru and Tharaka-Nithi Districts 1996-2004The design and its evolutionAt the request of the Ministry of Agriculture and Livestock Development, FARM-Africaplanned a Dairy Goat and Animal Healthcare Project in Meru and Tharaka-Nithidistricts of Kenya in 1994. This project benefited from the lessons learned in Ethiopiaand Tanzania as well as from visits to the GTZ project in Burundi and various smallgoat projects in Tanzania and Kenya. The project design, which is the basis of the GoatModel, set out to ensure that all the key inputs needed in the long term weredelivered by farmer-managed enterprises (breeding stock) or through private sectorsuppliers (veterinary services) recruited from the community. This would ensure thatat the end of the project farmers would have everything they needed to ensure thesustainability of all project interventions and would not be reliant on the governmentor any outside provider for any key inputs. This is the distinctive feature of this projectand forms the basis of the design of the Goat Model.Implementing partnershipsThe project was implemented in a productive and mutually beneficial partnershipbetween FARM-Africa and MALDM extension staff. This was important to ensure thatfarmers received the support they needed from staff already based in the field, andreduced the overall cost of the project by harnessing under-used government staff.Beneficiary selection and group formationGreat effort was made to work with community leaders to define poverty in theircommunities and use these indicators to identify the poorest of the poor. The selectedfarmers (61 per cent women 39 per cent men) were formed into groups of 20-25members that elected a committee and registered with the Ministry of Social Affairs.Those members who did not already own goats were provided with two Galla goatspurchased from northern Kenya.Breed improvementBreed improvement was through cross-breeding local goats owned by group membersat buck stations keeping a pure Toggenburg buck. The first cross-bred — or F1 —would be crossed again with a pure Toggenburg to produce a 75 % Toggenburg goat, 13
  • which would be named the Meru Goat, and stabilised at that blood level. Replacementbucks were bred at a small number of Breeding Units consisting of four females andone Toggenburg buck, managed by a farmer nominated by their group. It was agreedthat non-members could also use the services of the buck for a higher fee than thatcharged to members. The foundation stock of 130 British Toggenburg goats wasimported in three batches from the UK during the first three years of the project.The group selected individuals to be trained to become buck keepers and CAHWs.Training was provided to farmers on improved goat management, group dynamics,breed improvement and goat health. Buck keepers were trained how to manage theToggenburg bucks, use them effectively, record their performance and promote theiruse in their community.Animal health careHealth care would be provided through a pioneering community-based privateveterinary system. The system consists of a network of CAHWs (33 per cent women,67 per cent men) treating goats and other species supervised by Animal HealthAssistants (AHAs) — 50 per cent women — supported to obtain loans from the Co-operative Bank to establish rural drug shops in local market centres. In each of thetwo districts a young newly qualified veterinarian (one woman, one man) was helpedto obtain a loan from Barclays Bank to establish a private veterinary practice,consisting of a drug shop at the district headquarters, transport, drugs and equipment.These veterinarians would oversee the network in their district, supply drugs and treatcases referred to them. It was not easy to obtain loans from Barclays Bank — theywere reluctant to lend money for a new enterprise to young vets without collateral.This was surprising as they were the main conduit for EU funding to support theprivatisation of veterinary services at that time. FARM-Africa was forced to act asguarantor for part of the loan.Farmer organisationsA farmer organisation — the Meru Goat Breeders’ Association (MGBA) — wasestablished and registered as an association to oversee the breeding programme. Intime, the Meru Animal Health Workers’ Group (MAHWG) was set up. MAHWG 14
  • established a savings and credit association for its members to support thedevelopment of members’ businesses.ResearchTwo staff from the project carried out their doctoral research as part of the project.One looked in detail at the performance of local, cross-bred and pure Toggenburggoats. The second looked at the movement of information between farmers involvedand not involved. A doctoral student attached to the World Agroforestry Centre(WAC) carried out research on the performance of the groups to identify the keyelements of success. Good links were established with various research institutionsduring the course of the project, including KARI, ILRI and WAC.The benefitsThe project has been astonishingly successful and generated huge interest fromfarmers within the project area and increasingly from all over Kenya and East Africa(Olubayo, 2003; Hendy, 2003). Farmers ‘outside’ the project far out-number thoseoriginally targeted and the technology has spread rapidly and continues to do so(Davis, 2000). For example, in the project area the technology has spreadspontaneously from the original five divisions to 13 divisions, and breeding goats havebeen sold to 71 districts in Kenya, as well as to Uganda, Tanzania, Burundi andRwanda. It is therefore hard to measure the total impact and benefits from the originalproject investment because it has passed from farmer to farmer so rapidly, andcontinues to do so, that it has become impossible for the project team to track theadoption and performance of ‘adoptees’ outside the project area (Laker and Omore,2004).The benefits reported below, though remarkable, are those that the project hasmonitored of its own performance or have been found by independent consultants.Table 2 summarises the performance of the project within its designated project area. 15
  • Table 1. Summary of project performance 1996-2006Output NumberGroups 162Direct project beneficiaries 8,235 householdsPure Toggenburg 130 -> 1000 +Buck stations 162 (including 48 with 75% bucks)Buck services 62,000Cross-breds 56,741Breeding units 124Fodder trees distributed 200,000CAHWs trained 44AHAs 8Veterinarians 2Breed Associations established 1Divisions covered 5->13Districts in Kenya received goats 71Household level impactOver 8,235 families have benefited directly from the project. Every farmer gainedknowledge on goat husbandry and forage development with over 200,000 fodder treeseedlings distributed.Housing goats provided farmers with an easily collectable supply of high qualitymanure, which is highly valued in the area, particularly by coffee and vegetable farmers.A 16 litre ‘debe’ of goat manure can be sold for KShs 65 (US$1). Milk productionincreased dramatically and mortality rates fell to acceptable levels (Table 2). 16
  • Table 2. Performance of different breed types 1996-2006Breed Mean milk Mean Mean total Mortality Adult yield lactation lactation rate before mortality (ml/day) length (litres) weaning (%) (days) (%)Local 0.2 0 70 0 14 15-20 10Toggenburg 2.7 186 503 9 650% Toggenburg 2.6 200 520 7 575% Toggenburg 2.8 193 536 8 5Source: FARM-Africa: Camillus Ahuya, personal communication (2007)The growth rates before weaning of local goats increased from 78g/day for local goatsto 127g/day for 75% Toggenburg crosses (Ahuya, 2007). The pure Toggenburg, and itscrosses, all command a high price for both their meat and breeding value (Table 3).Table 3. Goat prices for different breed types in 2007 Price/kg + premium for Total priceBreed type breeding value (US$) (US$)Local 1 2575% 3 (+ $31 for breeding value) 154Pure Toggenburg 9 (+ $46 for breeding value) 415Source: FARM-Africa: Camillus Ahuya, personal communication (2007)The impact of the improved performance on farmer’s incomes is quite dramatic,increasing them from $93 per annum to $995 per annum. The value of the goat stockowned increased in value from $156 to $918. This tenfold increase in incomes andasset value represents a significant step out of poverty for the thousands of familiesbenefiting from the project. Many farmers have been able to invest in their farms, forexample by buying land, and some have invested in small businesses in rural centres(Laker and Omore, 2004). 17
  • Table 4. Typical local goat enterprise performance (4 females producing 5 kids of which3 are sold) Total value income Quantity Price and stock (per year) (US$) (US$)Manure 130 kg 1 8Milk 14 litres 0.5 7Sales 3 26 78Total 249COSTSLabour 184 184Total 184Net benefit 65Stock value 6 26 156Source: FARM-Africa: Camillus Ahuya, personal communication (2007)Table 5. Typical 75% Toggenburg goat enterprise (4 females producing 5 kids of which 3are sold) Total value of Quantity Price income and stock (per year) (US$)INCOME (US$)Manure 260 kg 1 16Milk 2144 litres 0.5 1,072Sales 3 (75% Toggenburg) 153 459Total 1.547COSTSMineral licks 4 2.5 10Veterinary costs 180Labour 1 369 369Total 559NET BENEFIT 988STOCK VALUE 6 153 918Source: FARM-Africa: Camillus Ahuya, personal communication (2007) 18
  • Buck keepersThe buck keeper keeps detailed records of serves given. The average number ofservices per buck per year was 120, with the record held by a buck that served 547times in a year. Average income from buck service charges was $79/year and frommanure $55/year, making a total income of $134/year. The buck keeper becomes afocal point of village life and source of advice for farmers bringing their goats formating which gives then great status in their community and other social benefits.Breeding unitOver 120 breeding units have been established under the project. They serve as theengine of the project producing pure Toggenburg goats for new buck stations and newbreeding units. Their performance is crucial to the success of the whole project. Thenumber of Toggenburg goats has grown from the original 130 imported as foundationstock to over 1000 in 2006. Breeding units need to be managed by outstandinglivestock keepers as they place a great demand on labour and skills early in the projectand they are expected to keep performance records. However, breeder unit managersderive significant benefits early in the project as they quickly have a significant supplyof milk for home consumption and sale.CAHWs’ performance 1997-2003Most CAHWs continue to perform a hugely valuable service to livestock keepers intheir community. CAHWs are farmers working part-time as CAHWs treating anaverage of 11 cases per month and charging an average of $2/case. Annual incomesamount to $264 p.a. on average with some CAHWs earning much more than this.CAHWs not only offer treatment for sick animals but also offer advice and training onhow to keep livestock healthy, becoming valuable extension workers in theircommunities. CAHWs also help to organise vaccination campaigns. A summary of theiroverall performance is given in Table 6. 19
  • Table 6 Summary of overall CAHW performanceCharacteristic NumberHouseholds using CAHWs 19,812Species treatedCattle 39%Goats 32%Poultry 22%Other 8%Total treatments per month 1,500-2,000Source: FARM-Africa (2003)Animal Health AssistantsAnimal Health Assistants (AHAs) are the vital link in the animal health system and arethe main source of drugs for CAHWs and farmers. Of the eight AHAs, most earn theirincome from clinical services (41per cent), drug sales (27 per cent) and AI (31 percent). All AHAs successfully repaid their loans obtained from the Co-operative Bankand are investing in their businesses mainly to obtain motorbikes to increase theirmobility and coverage (FARM-Africa, 2003).VeterinariansVeterinarians are based in urban centres and serve as the main supplier of drugs,provide treatment, including surgery, mainly to cattle, provide AI services and overseethe AHAs and CAHWs. Both vets were supported by FARM-Africa to set up theirveterinary business repaid their loan to Barclays Bank on time without defaulting. AfterFARM-Africa’s departure, one vet recruited from government service returned to it,while the other, who was unemployed at the time of recruitment, has built a goodhouse and is expanding her business. Vets obtain most of their income from drug sales(48 per cent); clinical services (25 per cent) and AI services (23 per cent).The Meru Goat Breeders’ Association (MGBA)The MGBA serves many functions that are growing in number with time. The currentfunctions are summarised in Table 7. The demands placed on the leaders of MGBA areimmense with the level of interest generated by the project. MGBA has recentlystarted charging $60 to groups wishing to visit them. 20
  • Table 7. Functions and activities of Meru Goat Breeders’ AssociationFunctions ActivitiesMaintenance of breed improvement Performance recordingservices Setting breed standards Supply breed information Judging and inspection Registration with the Kenya Stud BookMarketing Identification of breeding stock marketing outlets Milk marketing and processing Organising shows, field days and auctions Publicity and advertisingTraining/PR/networking Training officials/managers of MGBA on breed inspection and judging Showing visitors aroundGoats have been sold from the MGBA to at least 71 districts in Kenya and topurchasers in Uganda, Tanzania and Rwanda.The Meru Animal Health Workers’ Group (MAHWG)In 2000 the health care providers – Vets, AHAs and CAHWs - set up the Meru AnimalHealth Workers’ Group (MAHWG) to:• Act as a forum for all service providers working in the project area to exchange ideas;• Organise training for their members;• Represent members in scientific meetings and workshops and inform members of latest practice;• Develop linkages with important partners – drug suppliers, government bodies.In the absence of finance institutions willing to invest in MAHWG members at areasonable interest rate, they set up their own savings and credit group to lend moneyto members to develop their businesses. MAHWG is thriving and each member hasdeveloped his or her business in some way. Some examples of expansion include: onevet who has opened a second drug shop and one AHA who has paid for a (or his/her)drug shop attendant to train as a AHA themselves. MAHWG itself has won a contract 21
  • from the government to deliver AI services throughout Meru district. MAHWG plansto build its own diagnostic laboratory in the future.Milk marketingIn 2003 it became clear that there was surplus milk to the needs of the households.FARM-Africa and MGBA started a small milk processing plant in Nkubu a districtcentre with a capacity of 800l/day. The plant makes fresh pasteurised milk andflavoured yoghurts. The milk bar run by MGBA is very popular with town residents.Markets have been found locally and in a supermarket in Nairobi. Hospitals andchildren’s homes have also expressed interest in buying the milk and the Kenya Bureauof Standards is currently determining standards for goat milk and its products.Environmental benefitsSignificant benefits to the environment have accrued from the project. Goats arehoused and are not out grazing making the collection of urine-enriched manure easy.This manure is highly valued as fertiliser by coffee and vegetable growers. Over200,000 leguminous trees, mainly Calliandra, have been planted, together with severalmiles of elephant grass strips on the edges of farmers’ fields. All this amounts to asignificant benefit to the environment.Benefits to the nation and regionMGBA is currently the only supplier of pure Toggenburg goats in East Africa, whichpresents an immense challenge for such a small and relatively inexperienced farmers’organisation. The MGBA officials are under huge pressure to sell breeding stock andpossibly jeopardise the viability of the Toggenburg goat population in Meru itself.MGBA currently has a waiting list for over 1000 goats.The Government of Kenya, FARM-Africa’s main implementing partner has‘mainstreamed’ the Goat Model into its programmes. Extension staff now encourageany organisation involved in goat development to follow the breeding plan andstructure laid out in the breeding component of the FARM-Africa model.FARM-Africa staff has worked hard to gain official legal recognition and acceptance ofthe animal health care system pioneered in the project and FARM-Africa drafted whathas been accepted as the national curriculum for CAHW training in Kenya. New 22
  • legislation making the necessary legal provisions for CAHWs to deliver basicveterinary services remains in draft form awaiting review in parliament.NGOs and staff from the Ministry of Livestock Development have requested trainingto help them implement the Goat Model. FARM-Africa is now able to do so through itsexperienced staff in its Training and Advisory Units.Research resultsThe three doctoral research projects carried out by staff and a collaborator generatedvaluable data on goat performance, farmer-to-farmer spread of technology andknowledge and the characteristics of groups spontaneously set up by enthusiasticfarmers outside the project (Davis, 2003).Lessons learnedThe main lesson learned from implementing the project over 10 years has been thatthe design works. It is practical and delivers real benefits to a wide range ofbeneficiaries that can be sustained in the long term by the beneficiaries themselves.The need for MGBA and MAHWG to play a key role in sustaining vital services wasknown from the start of the project but FARM-Africa underestimated the scale of therole they would be forced to play. The original project was designed to supplybreeding stock to farmers in Meru and Tharaka-Nithi districts. not to the whole ofKenya and the rest of East Africa. The success of the project could prove its downfallunless others copy the design of the breeding programme in a systematic way, ensuringthat Toggenburg goats are bred in viable units throughout East Africa. This is a matterof very great urgency if the gains of the project are not to be eroded.The project would have been enhanced if the key actors — buck keepers, CAHWs andAHAs — had been trained in adult learning techniques. This would have helped thempass on their knowledge in an even more effective manner (Kaberia, 2007).Lessons continue to be learned about the evolving role of MGBA and how to supportthem to become a financially secure and effective farmer organisation.Many other lessons have been learned which have been built into the design of theGoat Model. 23
  • Uganda, Mbale District 2003-ongoingFARM-Africa’s project in Mbale in eastern Uganda was modelled on the Meru projectdesign. Originally it was planned to implement the project through the private sectorbut restrictions to funding of this project prevented it from being implemented in theoriginal manner. The project is implemented in Eastern Uganda in the districts ofMbale, Sironko, Manafwa, Bududa and Kapchorwa with partnership of the localgovernments in the respective districts and regular consultations with the Ministry ofAgriculture, Animal Industry and Fisheries, National Animal Genetic Resource Centreand Data Bank, National Agricultural Research Organisation and Makerere University.To date the project supports about 1,500 farmers organised into 39 farmer groups innine sub-counties. The project also works with The Aids Support Organisation (TASO)to provide support to families affected by HIV/AIDS. The initial breeding stock wasimported from FARM-Africa Kenya and Tanzania but the project continues to beseverely hampered by the Government of Uganda’s continued ban on the importationof breeding stock from anywhere outside Africa. The enthusiastic Elgon Dairy GoatBreeders’ Association is currently working closely with the project in implementationand monitoring of the activities.BenefitsThe project has already started to generate significant benefits at both the householdand community level (Alokit-Olaunah et al., 2007). There have been 3,181 buckservices recorded among members and non members with 1,144 F1 cross-breedsborn. The main benefits to farmers have been income from sale of castrates, goatmanure and goat milk, in addition to improved nutrition among farmers alreadyconsuming goat milk. The goat manure has been used by farmers to improve theircoffee, banana and vegetable gardens’ productivity.The project faces an overwhelming demand for Toggenburg goats and cross-breeds,and several district councils are adopting the model in order to support more farmergroups and are incorporating this into their district budgets.The Government extension staff work closely with the project team and are part ofthe animal health delivery referral system. Many requests for assistance from theproject have been referred by the Director, Animal Resources at the Ministry ofAgriculture. 24
  • Role of the Elgon Dairy Goat Breeders’ AssociationThe Elgon Dairy Goat Breeders’ Association (EDGBA) is an umbrella organisation thataims at ensuring post-project sustainability of dairy goat production in the Mount Elgonregion. The purpose of the Association is the development and promotion of theToggenburg dairy goat and its crosses through the encouragement of close fellowshipamong members through meetings, correspondence and cooperation with otherorganisations so as to economically empower and improve household nutrition in Mt.Elgon region through 75 per cent Toggenburg breeding.The association has registered 39 groups with about 35 members in each group. Thereis a hierarchical leadership structure ensuring representation of groups from eachdistrict.The Uganda Project uses the same breeding approach as the Meru project with the aimof producing a stabilised 75 per cent Toggenburg cross and a continuous supply ofpure Toggenburg goats to replenish the buck stations. Some farmers in the oldergroups have already got 75 per cent crosses and have set up of 75 per cent buckstations and breeding units from the selected 75 per cent is ongoing.Animal healthThere is a vibrant animal health service delivery referral system in the project areacomposed of the 39 Contact Farmers (15%women and 85% men) operating asCommunity Animal Health Workers (CAHWS). Each CF handles about 50 cases permonth, including referral cases. The system is providing an animal healthcare service tolivestock owned by farmers who had previously not had access to such a service. Thisis a significant achievement and it is hoped that the Government of Uganda will beginto recognise the potential role played by a community-based system animal healthsystem soon.The vet loan scheme for private vet service providers in the referral system has beenestablished in Sironko District only with 1 practice comprising 3 vets. The vets werefinanced through a Micro Finance Institution, recommended by the Eastern PrivateSector Development Foundation. 25
  • Kenya, Mwingi and Kitui Districts (in drier area) 2004 – ongoingIt was decided to test the Goat Model in a harsher environment and see if it could beadapted to drier environments and still work. To this end a project was prepared forMwingi and Kitui districts of eastern Kenya. To date the project has shown that themodel works well in drier areas and has been able to develop practical forageconservation techniques, including hay and silage making, to enable farmers to copewith the long dry season. Farmers’ groups have also dug several shallow wells toprovide water. A very dynamic Mwingi and Kitui Goat Breeders’ Association has beenestablished. The mobile phone company Safaricom supported the distribution ofmobile phones to CAHWs, AHAs and veterinarians. ‘Community Phones’ are set up atthe drug shops to provide a service to the community and from which the animalhealth worker can earn additional income.Case study of Theresia a Community Animal Health Worker in Mwingi, KenyaTheresia is a 30-year old widow and mother of three children. She was left desperatelypoor after her husband died of AIDS. She has been scraping a living by begging casualwork from neighbours and making sisal rope. With this work she was just able to giveher children one meal a day. She was selected by her community to receive a goat andbe trained as a Community Animal Health Worker (CAHW). This is when her lifechanged.She said “I received a drug kit, mobile phone and bicycle on credit and I realised I wasno longer the ‘beggar Theresia’, people knew, but a doctor! Look at me now! I used tolook like a 50 year-old widow with rough hands, now I look more like my real age andhave smoother hands. I have nice clothes, although second-hand, and my children nowhave three meals a day, as do I. You can see my face is shining! I am no longer thevillage pauper, see I can even afford to buy a front door to replace the sack that hungthere before, now that I have things of value inside. I no longer work as a casuallabourer but work for myself. Of course I have to bicycle long distances to serve myclients and I keep consulting the Animal Health Assistant for advice and read books. Ihandle my work professionally and even the Area Chief has come to my house forveterinary services”.In one year Theresia has treated 1,187 cases including 250 cattle, 857 goats, 33donkeys, I cat, 4 chickens and 42 dogs, earning nearly $500 from clinical fees. She alsohas 6 well-fed and well-housed goats and has even hired men to terrace her land, fromwhich has obtained 15 bags of maize, 3 bags of beans and 2 bags of sorghum; the kindof bumper harvest she never dreamed of before. 26
  • 8. The Goat Model - implementation procedureOverviewThe componentsThe FARM-Africa Goat Model consists of several inter-linked components that shouldbe implemented together for the model to have full impact. The success of the modelwould be greatly restricted if, for example, the breed improvement component isimplemented without the farmer training. The real value of the model lies in theintegration of its components. The model is not a one-size-fits-all approach. Withineach component participatory techniques are used to make sure that the way eachcomponent is implemented is suited to local circumstances.The only component that could be properly implemented by itself is the animal-healthcomponent which would, if implemented entirely, establish an effective animal healthcare system of immense value to livestock keepers in the area covered.The model is flexible and adaptable, with each component commencing withparticipatory entry techniques that ensure they are tailored to suit local circumstances.In particular, three optional components at the start of the model make sure themodel fits local circumstances – beneficiary identification, group formation and goatcredit. If the model is applied in situations where groups already exist and membersalready own goats, then these components need not necessarily be applied. In theabsence of these three modules, tailoring is achieved with the implementation of eachsubsequent component.The Goat Model without breed improvement?In some circumstances it may be beneficial to provide goats on credit to families inparticular need, without implementing the breed improvement component of themodel. However any goat intervention should be accompanied by training in goathusbandry including feeding and some provision for healthcare.An overview of the implementation steps and accompanying training package modulesis given in Figure 1. 27
  • Figure 1. The Goat Model: Implementation steps and training package modules Module 1 - Training for key staff in Implementation Procedure Start:After feasibility study and decision to implement Module 2 - - Training for key staff in Adult Learning and Development Approach Module 3 – Training for key field staff in Developing Partnerships Key Are beneficiaries Indicators Module 4 – Train field staff in No pre-selected? Identifying Beneficiaries Do strong groups exist? Module 5 – Train field staff in Group Formation and Development Module 6 – Train field staff in Is credit needed? Development of Credit for Goats KeyIndicators Module 8 – Community Animal Health Module 7 – Train farmers in Goat Module 9 – Community Based Breed Husbandry Improvement 8.1 ToT for CAHW Training 7.1 Basic Goat Husbandry 9.1 Training of Farmers in Breed 8.2 Training of Vets in Business Improvement Management 7.2 Fodder Establishment and Conservation 9.2 Training of Extension Workers in 8.3 Training of Vets in Business Planning Breed Improvement and Proposal Writing 9.3 Training of Keepers of Buck Stations 8.4 Training for Drug Shop Attendants and Breeding Units 8.5 Training of Community Animal Health 9.1 Training of Farmer Leaders in Workers Establishment of a Breed Association 9.1 Training of Farmers in Monitoring and Evaluation Key Indicators 28
  • FARM-Africa has prepared a comprehensive Training Package for staff of organisationswishing to implement the goat model. FARM-Africa has also published a referencemanual, “Improving Goat Production in the Tropics. A manual for developmentworkers” (Peacock, 1996). Field staff from agencies wishing to implement the modelcan be trained in using the package by staff from FARM-Africa’s Training and AdvisoryUnit.Implementing the goat model - Establishment phaseStep 1: Feasibility StudyIt is important before implementing the goat model to carry out a feasibility study tomake sure the model is appropriate in that location. Key considerations are:-• Farmer interest• Cultural attitude to goat milk consumption• Potential to adapt current goat management systems• Potential to develop community-based animal health care system• Availability of feeds and/or potential to grow fodder crops• Attitude and capacity of potential implementing partners – government, NGO, local government, traditional leaders etc.Step 2: Planning and sensitisationPlanning the intervention with key stakeholders is very important to make sure that allthose involved are behind the concept and that all necessary resources will be availableat the time required. As part of the process of consultation and planning the goatmodel needs to be explained and the roles of potential partners discussed andnegotiated. 29
  • Step 3: Establish implementation partnerships and operational roles andresponsibilitiesThe Goat Model requires partnerships to be developed at different levels for effectiveimplementation. The implementing agency will need to work with district-levelgovernment officials, including technical staff, as well as formal and traditionalcommunity leaders. It is essential that time is taken to inform all partners about themodel and agree the roles and responsibilities of all parties.The planning and sensitisation phase will help to identify the key partners that need tobe involved in implementing the Goat Model. If it is an NGO implementing the modelthey will need to link with government staff, particularly veterinary staff, to supportthe implementation of the model. Veterinary officers are key to supporting theimplementation of the animal health component and will need to understand what isplanned in their district. If it is government staff who are implementing the model theywill need to involve NGOs and CBOs already working with communities in theirimplementation.The key to successful implementation is jointly planning the work right from the startso that all partners feel involved and develop a sense of ownership and responsibilityfor implementing the model. Government staff may need to be enabled to workeffectively through the provision of transport, for example. This needs to be carefullynegotiated from the start and communicated to all concerned.Step 4: Training of implementersThe implementation team will need to be trained how to implement the componentsof the model. FARM-Africa will train a team of essential resource people from theimplementing organisation in management and operation of the model. If required,FARM-Africa can also help train field staff as well. A visit to an ongoing project will behelpful at the start so that the team have a vision of the future towards which they willwork.Underlying the model is a participatory approach to development and it is essentialthat all members of the implementing team believe in, and are conversant with, theparticipatory techniques embedded in the model. In some cases attitudinal changes may 30
  • need to take place among staff of implementing partners. Methods of encouraging thischange in attitude are built into the FARM-Africa Training Package.Step 5: Beneficiary targeting and selection (Optional)The Goat Model can be applied to help families of particular concern to theimplementing agency; for example, ‘the poorest of the poor’, women-headedhouseholds or HIV/AIDS affected families. The Goat Model is particularly suitable forwomen who, in many societies, traditionally look after goats, and can be trained toserve in all the service-provider roles - CAHWs, buck keepers, breeding unit managersetc.It may be that the implementing agency already works with farmer groups and wants tointroduce the Goat Model to them, in which case this step can be omitted.In order to ensure that families that fall into the particular category of interest aregenuinely selected and there is no room for manipulation or capture of the selectionprocess. It is important that local leaders and the implementing team are clear aboutthe objectives of the targeting and selection. If the objective is to select the poorestmembers of the community a meeting involving community and government leadersshould be convened to identify indicators of poverty within that community.Agreement needs to be reached by all parties what these indicators are so that thesame people can apply those indicators during the beneficiary selection process.Typical indicators of poverty are:-• livestock ownership• landholding size• quality of house• single headed family• off-farm employment• number/health of dependentsOnce families have been selected, visits should be made to the household itself toverify their status and ability to participate, before they are finally selected. This visit 31
  • provides an opportunity to collect data on individual households that can be used totrack changes to the status of the family over time.Step 6: Group formation (Optional)Cohesive action by the selected households is important to the operation of the healthand breeding components of the Goat Model. For this reason, once participatinghouseholds have been selected group strengthening activities are initiated. A groupsize of 20-25 has been found to be ideal. Strong farmer groups:-• Provide a focus for farmer training• Identify from amongst members a buck keeper and in some cases a breeding unit manager, with the group as a whole responsible for ensuring that the buck station and breeding unit are managed properly• Elect one of their members to be trained as a Community Animal Health Worker• Are responsible for, and manage, the credit provided to the group• Manage any other issues concerning the groupIf the implementing agency is working with existing cohesive groups, this step can beomitted.The members of the group will need to develop their constitution and rules governingthe group, elect leaders and, if possible, register with the appropriate governmentauthority.Step 7: Goat Credit (Optional)In many communities in Africa, lack of ownership of livestock is a key indicator ofpoverty. Where this is the case, it will be necessary to provide local goats on credit tofamilies in order for them to participate in the Goat Model.The breed improvement component of the Goat Model also involves goat creditprocedures and will supply a buck on loan to a breeding unit (as part of the buckrotation system) along with breeding stock on credit (with the same number of maleand female goats returned to establish a new breeding unit in another group). 32
  • It has been found from experience over many years that it is important that familiesreceive goats on credit leading them to value the animal because they have to repaythe loan in some way. It is never appropriate to provide goats freely to families,however tempting this may be to organisations with a strong humanitarian motivation.What is received for free is never valued and looked after in the same way as when apayment is made, however modest. This is fundamental to successful development.Organisations that give away inputs to farmers do nothing but undermine the self-respect, initiative and sense of responsibility of the individuals they are trying to help.Repayment can be in the form of repayment ‘in kind’ whereby a similar goat is repaidto that received or ‘in cash’ where the value of the goats is repaid in small instalmentsover an agreed time period. In most cases repayment in kind is preferable as it doesnot require literacy to manage and reduces the potential for corruption. The terms ofrepayment can vary from situation to situation and should be negotiated and agreed byall parties, cognizant of the principles of sound goat credit outlined above.Step 8: Group established and developed to support Goat ModelOnce a new group is formed or an existing group has decided to adopt the goat modelall the members of the group need to be made fully aware of their roles andresponsibilities. The group will need to select members for training as a buck keeper,a breeding unit manager and a Community Animal Health Worker.The group will need training to improve their functioning as a group, and the groupleaders will need training in leadership skills, responsibilities, stewardship of groupresources, record keeping and conflict resolution.Step 9: Farmer TrainingThe Goat Model assists farmers in developing their individual and collective skills ingoat management. Most farmers will have some understanding of how to look aftergoats under traditional management and some may be excellent at looking after theirlocal breeds of goats. However cross-bred goats require better feeding, housing andhealth care and in most cases these aspects of goat husbandry will need to be learned.Farmers receiving goats under a credit programme may not have much experience ofgoat keeping and will need to learn. 33
  • For the Goat Model to succeed and have widespread benefits to families it is essentialthat all farmers also receive training in the structure and functioning of the goat model.The structured training package prepared by FARM-Africa starts with an assessment ofthe local situation and gathers information on the way goats are managed, their levelsof production (numbers, kidding, milk, sales etc.) and the problems farmers face inkeeping goats (feeding, health, marketing, theft etc). This information provides valuablebaseline data against which to track changes. The package then investigates ways toimprove the feeding of goats, guidance how to keep goats healthy, and how building agoat house will improve the health and welfare of the goat.Housing goats reduces the amount of energy they waste looking for food and redirectsthat energy into production. Housing goats keeps goats healthier by reducing theircontact with other goats, which may be carrying diseases, and considerably reducingtheir exposure to internal parasites from grazing on common land contaminated byother livestock. Infection with internal parasites is probably the single biggest healthproblem, reducing their production, of goats in Africa.The ways in which farmers can improve the feeding of goats using local feeds as well asgrowing fodder crops need to be explored and tested by farmers. Good experienceneeds to be shared among the group. Conserving feed, through hay or silage-making,during the wet season to use during the dry season, will be new to most farmers andwill need to be explained clearly and tested by farmers.Step 9: Community-based animal health systemA strength of the goat model is the development of a reliable health care system towhich farmers can turn for guidance to prevent their goats getting sick, and help if theydo fall ill. In most countries in Africa the government veterinary system is under-funded, under-staffed and over-stretched. As a result the service offered to farmers,particularly away from urban centres, is very poor or non-existent. Owners of valuablecows may make use of the limited government veterinary service offered, but farmerskeeping goats or chickens can expect little service. 34
  • Overall structureFARM-Africa has pioneered a three-tiered community-based animal health care systemthat is financially viable and delivers affordable health care to even the poorestlivestock keeper. Qualified veterinarians, running their own private practices, train anetwork of farmers called CAHWs to treat simple diseases. The training coversdiseases affecting both goats and other species of livestock so that CAHWs can offeradvice to farmers on how to prevent their livestock getting ill by vaccination, goodfeeding, and management. In order to supply these CAHWs with drugs, a middle tierof veterinary para-professionals, often called Animal Health Assistants or AnimalHusbandry Officers, are helped to set up small rural drug shops, normally in marketcentres, easily accessible to CAHWs and other farmers. The AHAs purchase theirdrugs from the private veterinarians who are helped to establish good links withreliable drug companies. The volume of drugs purchased by the veterinarian on behalfof their ‘network’ helps to ensure a good discount on the price of drugs, keeping costslow and prices affordable to farmers. The veterinarian and AHAs can be recruited byword-of-mouth or through an advertisement in the newspaper. Ideally they originatefrom the project area. They should be able to obtain loans from financial institutions.The implementing agency may, in some cases, need to act as guarantor for part of theloan.This linked network of animal health care has proven to be financially viable for theservice providers and offers a means by which farmers can have access to affordabletreatments and reliable advice. It also offers a referral system whereby CAHWs canrefer difficult cases to AHAs, and AHAs can consult a qualified veterinarian for themost difficult cases. As mobile phone coverage expands, this system can becomeextremely efficient with each member of the network having a mobile phone tofacilitate rapid communication.The significant added advantage of this system is the role CAHWs can play in reportingnotifiable diseases to the relevant government authorities thus helping them to takeappropriate control measures in an extremely timely manner.Ideally, the veterinarians should be identified, helped to obtain finance, and have theirveterinary practice established before farmers are selected for training as CAHWs. 35
  • They would then be able to carry out the training of the CAHWs, supply their kits andestablish a relationship with them. If this is not possible then they should be used forrefresher training of CAHWs and re-supply of their kits.Veterinarians and AHAs will need training in business planning and management to helpthem obtain their loans. They will also employ drug shop attendants to look after thedrug shops in their absence. In most cases, these attendants will have insufficientknowledge in animal health and will therefore require training in basic animal health.CAHWs require training from a qualified veterinarian and equipping with a kit of drugsand basic equipment. Careful consideration needs to be given to the level of fees theywill charge to make sure they have sufficient incentive to be active and yet charge aprice that is affordable to farmers. In Kenya and Tanzania there is a CAHW trainingcurriculum approved by the relevant professional bodies. Where a national standardexists it should be followed. The FARM-Africa training package not only conforms to,but also exceeds, all the national standards currently found in East Africa.Step 10: Breed improvementMotivationGaining access to a new ‘improver breed’ is the main incentive for farmers to becomeinvolved in the goat model. Farmers are no different from anyone else and areattracted to new things that look different from what they have previously known.FARM-Africa strongly recommends using the Toggenburg breed which it has tested inthree counties and found to be ideal for most situations in East Africa. Other breedsthat might be available are the Saanen, Alpine, Anglo-Nubian. The Toggenburg goat istwice the size of local goats in Africa and looks very different from local breeds. It isnovel, offers massive increases in production, and farmers all over East Africa that haveheard about them want to get hold of them. This excitement and motivation isexcellent to have at the start of the application of the goat model but needs to betempered with the understanding that these new goats will only perform if fed andmanaged significantly better than the normal level of management of local goats. 36
  • Practical breed improvementFARM-Africa has found by far the most practical method of breed improvement forAfrica to be the cross-breeding of local goats with an improver breed, such as theToggenburg, to produce a 50% cross which is bred again, to a different Toggenburgbuck, to produce a goat which is 75% Toggenburg. The 75% goat has been found tohave a good mixture of characteristics from both breeds. It retains the hardiness ofthe local breed but offers significantly better milk production and faster growth rates.The 75% female can then be mated with a 75% male to produce 75% kids and so on,stabilising the breed at 75% level.It is important that as the proportion of Toggenburg, or `improver breed, increasesthe management of the goats also improves.Buck stationsThe most cost-effective method of organising this system is to place Toggenburg bucksin buck stations where a group lives and in a location accessible to all group members.A fee is charged for each mating and if the female does not conceive the owner isallowed to bring their goats again for a free service. Bucks can mate with up to two-three females/day if well fed, but in practice mate with a female every other day. Tomaximise its potential, the buck can also mate with goats belonging to farmers who arenot members of the group who are charged a higher fee, generating income for thegroup. To avoid inbreeding the bucks do not stay at one station for longer than 18months so there is no danger that they will mate with their daughters. This buckrotation is an essential part of the model and needs to be well co-ordinated. This is arole for the breed association.The buck station keeper who feeds and manages the buck is trained to record itsservices, collect fees, and promote its use in the community. It is also worth trainingthe buck keeper in basic training skills so they can act as a source of advice andtraining to the whole community.Breeding UnitsBreeding Units are established at the community level to ensure a continuous supply ofbucks for buck stations. A breeding unit comprises three females and one maleToggenburg. It is not necessary to have a Breeding Unit for every farmer group. Theyshould be located strategically and managed very well because they contain extremely 37
  • valuable breeding stock of benefit to the whole community for generations to come.The goats provided to the breeding unit are given on credit and the same number andsex ratio are repaid as weaned kids to enable new breeding unit to be set up in a newlocation.Breed AssociationIt is important that there is a farmer organisation formed to oversee the breedimprovement component, to co-ordinate the buck rotation, establishment of new buckstations, breeding unit credit repayment, and setting up new breeding units. The sizeand scope of this organisation will depend on the scale of the application of the goatmodel. It may be that a Breed Association will be established at the district level or ata more localised level. The association will need representatives from each farmergroup and will need to prepare a constitution and elect a committee to manage itsaffairs. 38
  • Table 8 Goat Model implementation timelineTime line Activity Considerations for implementing(months) Key events agency1-6 Establishment phase Feasibility study Feasibility study Planning and sensitisation of Planning and sensitisation potential partners Establish implementation partnerships Train own staff Training of implementers Negotiate partnerships Beneficiary targeting Train implementing team Group formation Source and buy goats for credit Goats distributed on credit Groups established6-8 Veterinarian trained and set up in business Ensure farmers are trained and AHAs set business practice training CAHWs trained and equipped Train vets and AHAs in business Farmer training planning and support their Buck keepers trained buck station application to finance institution established Enable vet to train CAHWs and Breeder unit established equip them Training in growing fodder Ensure supply of fodder planting material ready for start of wet season8-10 Breed Association established Begin training Breed Association officials in leadership, management14 First cross-bred kids born Make sure farmers are trained to First Toggenburg kids born look after crossbreds and know what to expect18 First cross-bred (50%) kid mated to Toggenburg buck24 First cross-bred kid gives birth to 75% kid Cross-bred milked for first time48 First 75% female gives birth and is milked Look at milk marketing potential 39
  • Implementing the Goat Model – Ongoing support phaseOnce the key components of the Goat Model have been established and the initialtraining has been carried out there will need to be some ongoing support andsupervision provided. How long this lasts and what form it takes will depend on eachsituation. FARM-Africa encourages any agency implementing the Goat Model to besensitive to local conditions, learn from farmers and their experience and supportfarmers to find solutions to problems they encounter. In this way farmers individuallyand as a group will learn to solve their own problems rather than being reliant onoutsiders. There will be need for innovation and adaptation of the model during itsapplication to make sure it fits local circumstances and implementing agencies need tosupport farmers to learn.There are certain critical phases that will need to be passed through and farmers willneed support when first encountered. These include:• First mating with buck• First cross-bred kids born• First dry season experienced• Milking pure Toggenburg• Raising cross-bred kids for first time• Milking cross-breds• Organising the first goat showMilking, milk marketing and processingThe first cross-bred goat will be milked after about two years of modelimplementation. Farmers will need to be trained in milking, milk handling and hygienebefore this happens. Farmers will relish the amount of milk produced and at the startwill use most of the milk at home to feed children or the sick. Once the amount ofmilk produced by farmers in the community increases, as it will after three-four years,consideration will have to be given to options for developing new milk markets forfresh or processed milk. In most cases there will be a local demand for goat milk fromneighbours, local markets and local hospitals. Hospitals have found that goats’ milk ismore easily consumed than cows’ milk and is useful for treating sick patients, 40
  • particularly AIDS patients. In most countries in Africa goats’ milk has a higher pricethan cows’ milk.Processing milk can add to is value increasing its price tenfold in the case of yoghurt,for example. Goat milk can be processed into pasteurised fresh milk, flavoured milk,hard and soft cheese, ice cream and yoghurt. If the numbers justify investment in asmall milk processing facility this may be managed by the Breed Association, forexample or another milk marketing organisation could be set up.Marketing malesCross-bred males should be castrated to stop them breeding, and fattened for sale.Cross-bred males grow very fast and can attain 35-40kg within 10 months. They willnormally command a higher price than local breeds of goats and the meat has beenfound to be very tender and desirable. There is also the potential to add value toselling males goats through groups setting up their own butcher’s shop, or roastingmeat for direct sale to consumers. As the number of males grows, there is also thepotential to process meat into burgers or sausages, perhaps selling these products tosupermarkets thus adding considerable value to the meat.Development of the Breed AssociationAs the model is implemented the role of the Breed Associations will change andevolve. They will be responsible for helping to set up the breeding components andmanaging the buck rotation and breeding units. They should register and record allcross-bred goats born. The Breed Associations should be responsible for sellingbreeding stock on commission, and might also organise goat shows at which farmerscan show off their goats and win prizes. The Breed Association could also developlinks with other breed associations to exchange breeding stock. The income of thebreed association will be based on group and individual membership fees, commissionfrom sales, commission on awards won at shows, and entrance fees at goat shows.The association may also develop market outlets for goat milk, breeding stock andfattened stock, and consider ways in which they can add value to the goat productsthrough processing or direct selling. 41
  • It is essential that the association is transparent and follows good practice ingovernance and management. The implementing agency will need to provide training tothe officers of the association from the start to lay the foundations for good behaviourand practice.Adopting the Goat ModelLikely adopters of modelThe Goat Model can be adopted by any organisation working with rural communities.It is not necessary for them to have specialist skills in animal production or veterinaryscience, although it would be helpful if they did. Adopters should have basic skills incommunity development and capacity to implement field activities and work withfarmers and development partners. The Goat Model is likely to be adopted by localand international NGOs, including church and similar small community groups, as wellas government departments.Scale of adoptionThe Goat Model can be adopted at different scales depending on the interest andcapacity of the adopting agency. It could be applied at a district level or at a smallerscale. Table 10 (page 45) gives some indicative costs of some of key inputs required toimplement the Goat Model at 2007 prices. It also indicates the minimum scale at whichimplementation could be carried out.Requirements in order to adopt modelTo successfully implement the Goat Model the adopting agency would need to have orhave access to:-• Staff trained in using the model• Veterinarian to train and certify CAHWs• Supply of local goats (if required)• Supply of sufficient numbers of an improver breed to establish a foundation herd (ideally Toggenburg)• Drugs and equipment to stock and re-supply CAHW kit 42
  • • Supply of forage planting material (if required)• Ear tags and records booksConclusionThe Goat Model offers a tried and tested approach to improving the lives ofsmallholder farmers in Africa and a means to lift their annual incomes from $100 toover $1,000. This is a significant improvement and, if widely applied across Africa,would have a significant impact on rural poverty across the continent. 43
  • Benefits of adoptionThe benefits of adoption are summarised in Table 9. The benefits of adopting themodel are many and are both quantitative and qualitative.Table 9. Benefits of adoption of the Goat ModelBENEFITSIndividual Group & wider community DistrictIncreased: Leadership skills Improved diseaseOwnership of assets Access to buck services surveillanceManure Access to veterinary advice New products:Milk for home use and treatment Milk & milk productsImproved child and adult Access to veterinary drugs Meatnutrition Buck keeper Goat showsIncome from milk sales Income from service fees Empowered district staffIncome from selling males Manure Access to veterinary adviceIncome from breeding stock Soil fertility and services including AIsales Social standing servicesImproved soil fertility and Breeding Unit Manager Purchase of veterinarystability from manure and Income from breeding stock drugsfodder crops salesSkills & status Milk for home use and sale Breed AssociationSupport from group Manure Improved district leadershipImproved social network Social standing and co-ordination CAHW Contribution to district Income from treatment fees development Status in community Links to national networks Animal Health Assistants Employment and income Veterinarian from selling drugs, treating Employment and income cases, AI services from selling drugs, treating cases, AI services 44
  • Table 10. Some indicative unit costs of inputs and a minimum size of implementationunit.Activity Indicative unit cost Minimum unit (US$)Goat Credit 50 each 5 groups of 25 members = 250 goats Total US$12,500Training (farmers, buck Total US$2,000keepers, CAHWs etc)Animal Health Component 300/kit 5 CAHWsCAHW Total: US$1,500AHAsVetsBreed Improvement 300 1 breeding unitPurchase of Toggenburg 300 5 bucksMales =10 goatsFemales Total: US$3,000Total cost US$20,000 45
  • ReferencesPlease note that some of the references are incomplete (working version 1 June 2007)Ahuya, C.O. (1997) Community-based Goat Improvement Project in Meru Central and Meru SouthDistricts: The FARM-Africa experiences. In: Ahuya and Van Houton (eds.). Proceedings of GoatDevelopment in Eastern Africa, Workshop, 8th-l1th December, l997. Izaak Walton Inn,Embu, Kenya. pp.55-66.Ahuya C.O., Cartwright, T.C., Ruvuna, F. and. Okeyo. A.M.(1987) Additive and HeteroticEffects from Cross-breeding Goats In Kenya. Proc. of 6th SR-CRSP Kenya Workshop. Held atILRAD, Kabete, Nairobi, Kenya, 4-6, November, 1987. pp:15-22.Ahuya, C. and van Houten, H. 1998 (eds) Goat Development in East Africa: Practical experiencesand the way ahead. Proceedings of a workshop held in Embu, Kenya. 7-11 December 1997.Alokit-Olaunah, C., Namugwanya Misinde, Bisagaya, A. and Wabule, C. (2007) Mbale DairyGoat and Animal Healthcare Project. Impact Assessment Report, March, 2007, Mbale, UgandaDavis, K [to be completed]Delgado, C., Rosegrant, M., Steinfeld H., Ehui, S. and Courbois, C. 1999. Livestock to 2020 –The next food revolution. Food, Agriculture, and the Environment Discussion Paper. no. 28.IFPRI (International Food Policy Research Institute), Washington, DC, USA; FAO (Food andAgriculture Organization of the United Nations), Rome (Italy); ILRI, Nairobi (Kenya).IFPRI Washington, D.C. (USA). 72 pp. [to be completed]FARM-Africa (1999) Meru and Tharaka-Nithi Dairy Goat and AnimalHealth care Project (Phase I I). April 1999 – March 2003. FARM-Africa, London.FARM-Africa (2004) Meru Goat Breeders’ Association Business innovationsfor self-sustenance – Development strategy 2005 (draft)Field, A. (1978) The impact of sheep and goats on the vegetation of the arid zone. Technicalreport E-2, IPAL, NairobiField, C. (1981) A summary of livestock studies within the Mt Kulal study area. IPAL Technicalreport A-3. IPAL, Nairobi. 46
  • Fitzhugh, H. A. (1982) Dual-purpose goat production systems for smallholder agriculturalists. Proc.of 7th SR-CRSP Kenya Workshop. Held at Nairobi, Kenya, 15, March, 1982. pp:10-11.Heffernan, C. (2006) [to be completed]Hendy, C. (1998) .Meru and Tharaka-Nithi Dairy Goat and Animal Healthcare Project. September7 –16, 1998. Draft report.Hendy, C. (2000) Meru Dairy Goat and Animal Healthcare Project: Phase II, Mid-term ReviewReport pp. 50. FARM-Africa, UK.Hendy, C., 2001. Meru dairy goat and animal healthcare project: Phase II. Mid Term Review.FARM-Africa, UK.Kaberia, B. (2002) Enhancing the spread of the dairy goat practices among smallholders in Meru.[to be completed]Kairi, W. (2003) Socio and institutional impact assessment. Meru Goat and Animal Healthproject. Anthill Consultants, Nairobi.Kotze J.E. and Schonfeldt, H.C. (1996) Nutritional value of animal products and its impact onhuman health. In Meissner (ed.). Proc. of Food Security in Africa, Second All AfricaConference on Animal Agriculture, 1-4 April, l996. Pretoria, South Africa.pp.115-136.Laker, C. and Omore, A. (2004) Documentation of the institutional and technical processes fromthe Meru dairy goat breeding programme. External consultants’ report, FARM-Africa, Nairobi.Livestock in Development. 1999. Livestock in Poverty-Focused Development. Crewkerne:Livestock in Development. [to be completed]Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development (MoARD), 2000. Proposed Policies for thedelivery of veterinary services in Kenya. Dept of Veterinary Services and Kenya VeterinaryBoard. Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development, 2000, Kenya.Mohamed M. A., Bezabih E.,. Jabbar, M. and Ehui, S. (2002) Analysis of Economic and nutritionalimpacts of market-oriented dairy production in the Ethiopian highlands. Forthcoming, Socio-economic and policy Working Paper. International Livestock Research Institute ILRI,Livestock Policy Analysis. Addis Ababa, Ethiopia.Mukhebi, A. (1998) Economics of the Meru and Tharaka-Nithi Districts Dairy Goat andAnimal Healthcare Project [to be completed]Mwandotto, B.A.J., Ahuya, C.O., Ruvuna, F. and Taylor. J.F. (1990) Milk yield potential of theKenya Dual Purpose Goat (DPG). Proc. of 7th SR-CRSP Kenya Workshop. Held at ILRAD,Kabete, Nairobi, Kenya, 7-8th,March, 1990. pp:12-14. 47
  • Newman C. and Harris D.M. (1999) Contribution of animal source foods in improving dietsquality for children in the developing world. World Bank, Washington, DC.Okeyo A.M.(l997) Challenges in goat improvement in developing rural economies of Eastern Africa,with special reference to Kenya. In: Ahuya and Van Houton (eds.). Proc. of Goat Developmentin Easte Africa, Workshop, 8th-l1th December, l997. Izaac Walton Inn, Embu, Kenya. pp.55-66. FARM-Africa, Nairobi, Kenya.Okeyo, A.M. (2000). The role of crossbreeding in the development of a dual purpose goat forsmall-holder production systems in Kenya. In Proc. Workshop on Dairy goat Research &Production in Kenya: 20 Years on — Which way?, Held at The Garden Hotel, Machakos,Kenya, 11-12, October, 2000.Olubayo, R. (2003) Impact Assessment Report of Meru and Tharaka-Nithi Dairy Goat and AnimalHealthcare Project. [to be completed]Onim J.F.M., Ochola, P., Fitzhugh, H., Oduor, J. and K. Otieno. (1990). The potential of goatmanure as a valuable fertilizer for small-scale farmers. In the proceedings of the 8th SR-CRSP.Scientific Workshop. Held at ILRAD, Nairobi on 7-8th March 1990, Nairobi, Kenya. pp. 157-170.Owen, E etc (2006) [to be completed]Peacock, C. (1996) Improving goat production in the tropics. A manual for development workers.Oxfam/FARM-Africa, Oxford.Puranik L.D. (1992) Goat milk in infant feeding. In: Lokeshaw,R.R., Aruna. T. Kumar andDhowale, S. (eds.). Recent Advances in goat production: Proceedings of V InternationalConference on Goats, 2-8 March l992. New Delhi, India, International Goat Association.pp.1860-1863.Rey, B. (1992) Contribution of cross-bred goats to milk production and social welfare in Burundi. InKategile, J.A. and Mubi, S (eds) (1992) Future of livestock industries in East and southernAfrica. Proceedings of a workshop held at Kadoma Ranch Hotel, Zimbabwe, 20-23 July 1992.ILCA, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia.Rey, B. and Jacob, U. (1991). Farm structure and participation in the Ngozi goat cross-breedingproject in Burundi. In: Proceedings of the 9th SR-CRSP annual meeting, Nairobi, Kenya, 8-9March 1990. 48
  • Ruvuna F., Cartwright, T.C., Blackburn, H., Okeyo, M. and Chema, S.(1988). Gestation length,birth weight and growth rates of purebred indigenous goats and their crosses in Kenya. Journal ofAgricultural Science 111(2):363-368.Ruvuna F., Taylor, J.F. Okeyo, M., Wanyoike, M. and Ahuya, C.(1992). Effects of breed andcastration on slaughter weight and carcass composition of goats. Small Ruminant Research 7:175-183.Ruvuna F., Waruiru R.M., Taylor J.F., Davis S.K., Mwandotto B.A.J., Rurangirwa F.R. andMcGuire T.C. (1992). Production parameters and resistance to gastrointestinal helminths of theKenya dual purpose goat. In: Lokeshwar R.R. and Aruna T. Kumar (eds). Proceedings of VInternational Conference on goats. New Delhi, India 2-8 March 1992. International GoatAssociation. pp. 652-657.Ruvuna, F., Ahuya, C.O., Okeyo, M. and Cartwright, T.C.(1989). Growth parameters ofindigenous goat breeds and crosses with Toggenburg and Anglo Nubian in Kenya. Proc. of 7thSR-CRSP Kenya Workshop. Held at ILRAD, Kabete, Nairobi, Kenya, 22-23, February, 1989.pp:11-19.Ruvuna, F., Cartwright, T.C., Blackburn, H., Okeyo, M. and Chema, S.(1988b). Lactationperformance of goats and growth rates of kid under different milking and rearing methods inKenya. Anim. Prod., 46:237-242.Ruvuna, F., Cartwright, T.C., Okeyo, M., Ahuya, C.O. and Chema, S. (1988a) Characterizationof goats production potential in a tropical environment: factors affecting body weight of East Africanand Galla goats and estimates of their mature weight. J. Agric. Sci. 1988.Ruvuna, F., Cartwright, T.C., Okeyo, A.M. and Tallam S. (1987) Appraisal of a mating strategyand selection criteria for evolving a dual purpose boat breed for Kenya. Proc. of 6th SR-CRSPKenya Workshop. Held at ILRAD, Kabete, Nairobi, Kenya, 4-6, November, 1987. pp:4-14.Schmidt, U. (1990) Evolution et résultats de neuf années de projet germano-burundais dans lecadre de la coopération technique. Capricorne 3 (1).Stotz, D. (1981). Dairy goats or dairy cattle? A smallholder farm management analysis.Working paper No. 2, Ministry of Livestock Development, Government of Kenya, Nairobi,KenyaZewdu, A. (1999) Reducing drought difficulties through goats: The experiences of FARM-Africa’sDairy Goat Programme in Eastern Hararghe. In Proceedings of the Third Annual EAGODENWorkshop, Harar, Ethiopia, November 1999. 49
  • FARM-Africa support to adoptersResources available to support adoptionMaterials• The Goat Model Training Package• Goat Story Video (2002) — www.farmafrica.org.uk/documents/74.WMV• Farmers’ Dairy Goat Production Handbook (2003) – FARM-Africa — www.farmafrica.org.uk/documents/31.PDF• Delivering Affordable and Quality Animal Health Care to Kenya’s Rural Poor — FARM-Africa (2002) — www.farmafrica.org.uk/documents/24.PDF• Goats: Unlocking their potential for Africa’s farmers (2005) — FARM-Africa — www.farmafrica.org.uk/documents/123.PDF• Manual: Peacock, C. (1996) Improving Goat Production in the Tropics. A manual for development workers. Oxfam/FARM-Africa, Oxford.For Training and Advisory ServicesTAU KenyaBrian Kiswii, TAU ManagerFARM-Africa KenyaPO Box 4950200100 NairobiKenyaT +254 20 273 2203; F +254 20 273 2086;E brian@farm-africa.orgwww.farmafrica.org.uk/programme.cfm?programmeID=25&context=region&regionID=4TAU UgandaDr Shamilla Namusisi, TAU ManagerFARM-Africa Uganda —Mbale OfficePO Box 855, Mbale,UgandaT +256 45 34992; F +256 45 34992;E farmmbale@utlonline.co.ug 50
  • TAU EthiopiaWondu Tsegaye, TAU ManagerFARM-Africa EthiopiaPO Box 5746Addis AbabaEthiopiaT +251 11 1551 208; F +251 11 1552 143E farmtau@ethionet.etwww.farmafrica.org.uk/programme.cfm?programmeID=26&context=region&regionID=1TAU South AfricaLazarus Joseph, Acting Country DirectorFARM-South AfricaPO Box 2410, Kimberley 8300, South AfricaT +27 53 831 8330F +27 53 831 8333E lazarus@farmncape.co.zawww.farmafrica.org.uk/programme.cfm?programmeID=36&context=region&regionID=9FARM-Africa (Head Office)Dr Christie Peacock, Chief ExecutiveCliffords Inn, Fetter Lane,London, UKT +44 (0 20 7430 0440; F +44 (0)20 7430 0460E farmafrica@farmafrica.org.uk; W www.farmafrica.org.uk 51
  • 52
  • FEEDBACK FORMDoes this working paper present the material adequately? Y NIf not, please explain..................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................Was the language appropriate? Y NIf not, please explain………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………Did you notice any errors in the document? Y NPlease note………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………Additional comments………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………Would you like any further information about…:The issue presented in this working paperFARM-Africa’s strategyFARM-Africa’s Models of Best PracticesFARM-Africa’s Policy workFARM-Africa’s Training and Advisory ServicesFARM-Africa’s Raising Awareness workYour contact details:Address:………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..Email: ………………………………………………@..............................................................Please return this form to: info@farmafrica.org.uk 53
  • NOTES 54
  • Working PapersFARM-Africa’s Working Papers provide a forum for FARM-Africa staffto share key aspects and experiences drawn from their work with a wideraudience in an effective and timely manner. The series, available in print anddigital formats, comprises short outputs from FARM-Africa’s programmesin East and Southern Africa and will be of interest to NGO andintergovernmental staff, government personnel, researchers and academicsworking in the fields of African and agricultural development. 9. The Goat ModelInformation published in the series may reflect work, thinking anddevelopment in progress and, as such, should be treated, and referred to,as draft information only. It should not be considered as FARM-Africa’s final A proven approach to reducing povertyposition on any issue and should be welcomed as a contribution to sharinginformation and expertise openly within the international community. among smallholder farmers in Africa by developing profitable goat enterprisesFor further information on FARM-Africa’s Working Papers, and sustainable support servicesplease contact:Communications DepartmentFARM-AfricaCliffords InnFetter LaneLondon EC4A 1BZ Working Version 1 forUK comment: June 2007T +44 (0) 20 7430 0440 F +44 (0) 20 7430 0460E info@farmafrica.org.uk W www.farmafrica.org.uk© FARM-Africa 2007